Staten Island Bus Proposal Thread 2012-2013

[checkmatechamp13]

And this is why the S60 had poor ridership, let alone it only ran between Grymes Hill and Emerson Hill.

 

 

Actually, it ran between Grymes Hill & Sunnyside (well, technically it was a loop starting at Sunnyside). It didn't really serve Emerson Hill. The only reason it made that loop over by Milford Drive was to serve Petrides.

 

What about EXPRESS BUS routes operating via &/or serving Todt Hill Rd and/or Ocean Terrace and that vicinity/area/corridor?

 

I know the prospects of ANYTHING on Todt Hill Rd (except buses NOT IN SERVICE heading to &/or from the end/start of their route) are grim to nil/0 due to the rich (& therefore influential) folk$ living up & along there.

 

 

I doubt it. You have to consider that Todt Hill isn't only wealthy, but its population density isn't that high. Therefore, the potential for ridership isn't that great. Aside from that, I'm sure some residents would complain about the express buses making noise, so I doubt even an express bus would work over there. You're just better off letting them drive to the express bus like they currently do.

 

I figure I might as well elaborate on my earlier comment to QJT about how there are wealthy areas with public transportation. I figure I might as well list them out: There are portions of Todt Hill & Lighthouse Hill within walking distance of Richmond Road, though you might have to deal with some hills (but they would have to deal with hills to access a route along Ocean Terrace). Then you have Randall Manor, Livingston (to a certain extent), and Grymes Hill (though the wealthy parts aren't really near any transit). Some people consider Ward Hill to be wealthy, but there are only a few sections, and the rest is basically average. Aside from that, wealthy people don't necessarily have to live in wealthy neighborhoods. You could have a wealthy person who moves to an area like Westerleigh, Silver Lake, Sunset Hill, or a lot of areas on the South Shore, because while they're above-average, they aren't actually wealthy. Or for all you know, they could just live in an average neighborhood and keep a low profile. I think I heard somewhere that Debi Rose (the city councilwoman for the North Shore) lives in Mariners' Harbor. I obviously don't know her personal financial situation, but she's very likely living below her means.

 

But in any case, that was my point: That if they're using public transportation, they have other options on Staten Island besides Todt Hill (not to mention, a bunch of areas in the other 4 boroughs they could live in)

[Turbo19]

I'll just state something. I'm sure there is riders from Todt Hill, but likely you can count ridership using the fingers on your hands. The point I'm trying to make is that you can't nessacarily expect the TA to provide exclusive service to one area, even if it's for coverage reasons. What good is a route if it only garners 5-10 riders a trip.

 

Lastly, if I choose to reside in Todt Hill, I would probably expect transit service to be indirect. So honestly, I would have no problem walking to the neighboring services. And in my opinion, there are many other areas in SI, and the other boroughs that are share the same qualities and offer better transportation options.

[checkmatechamp13]

I'll just state something. I'm sure there is riders from Todt Hill, but likely you can count ridership using the fingers on your hands. The point I'm trying to make is that you can't nessacarily expect the TA to provide exclusive service to one area, even if it's for coverage reasons. What good is a route if it only garners 5-10 riders a trip.

 

Lastly, if I choose to reside in Todt Hill, I would probably expect transit service to be indirect. So honestly, I would have no problem walking to the neighboring services. And in my opinion, there are many other areas in SI, and the other boroughs that are share the same qualities and offer better transportation options.

 

 

Now that I think about it, the people using the transit services in the area don't necessarily have to be living in the area. If you work as a nanny or something (which would be the case in an area like Todt Hill), that would be an example.

 

Of course, I still think there should be no service going through Todt Hill, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

 

In any case, I'd like to propose a minor change related to the S84 route. I think there should be another stop added by the Berry Houses, and maybe another one added by Lincoln Avenue (not really for the S51 connection, but more because there are some apartment buildings further down that might provide a couple of riders). It's not really going to attract any riders coming from St. George (because the SIR is faster), but it might attract some riders going from that area to places like the ETC. Of course, it won't be tons of riders, but it'll be a few more. I think that stretch between Narrows Road South & New Dorp Lane is too long without any stops in between.

[qjtransitmaster]

Now that I think about it, the people using the transit services in the area don't necessarily have to be living in the area. If you work as a nanny or something (which would be the case in an area like Todt Hill), that would be an example.

 

Of course, I still think there should be no service going through Todt Hill, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

 

In any case, I'd like to propose a minor change related to the S84 route. I think there should be another stop added by the Berry Houses, and maybe another one added by Lincoln Avenue (not really for the S51 connection, but more because there are some apartment buildings further down that might provide a couple of riders). It's not really going to attract any riders coming from St. George (because the SIR is faster), but it might attract some riders going from that area to places like the ETC. Of course, it won't be tons of riders, but it'll be a few more. I think that stretch between Narrows Road South & New Dorp Lane is too long without any stops in between.

 

I like super LTDs like S84 sadly it's unidirectional.

[S78 via Hylan]

You're right, the S84 does have a long skip from Narrows Rd to New Dorp Lane, but that's because not many people get on or off at those stops in between. Most people just take the S74 anyway. Residents by the Berry Houses/Projects usually revert to the SIR or their own vehicles, but you do have some that take the bus.

Edited November 23, 2012 by S78 via Hylan

[qjtransitmaster]

You're right, the S84 does have a long skip from Narrows Rd to New Dorp Lane, but that's because not many people get on or off at those stops in between. Most people just take the S74 anyway. Most people by the Berry Houses/Projects usually revert to the SIR or their own vehicles, but you do have some that take the bus.

 

main reason why you will never see a bus on amboy.

[checkmatechamp13]

You're right, the S84 does have a long skip from Narrows Rd to New Dorp Lane, but that's because not many people get on or off at those stops in between. Most people just take the S74 anyway. Residents by the Berry Houses/Projects usually revert to the SIR or their own vehicles, but you do have some that take the bus.

 

 

I know that, but the thing is that there aren't many people on the bus itself (I remember a while back, you mentioned that the S84 empties out at Broad Street by the Stapleton Houses, which makes sense because further south, riders are either on the train, or the areas are less densely populated and people are either driving or on the express bus). The point of the limited is to have people benefit from the quicker ride, but there aren't many people on board to benefit. It's not like say, the S91/92 alongside Silver Lake Park, where they have a decent amount of riders on board who benefit from skipping all those stops.

 

I mean, the thing is that the S84 splits away from the SIR once you pass New Dorp, so the SIR doesn't help those riders seeking areas like the ETC or points along Arthur Kill Road west of Richmond Avenue. I know there's not a lot of riders who board by the Berry Houses, but it's not a lot of riders are already on board the buses either.

 

main reason why you will never see a bus on amboy.

 

 

What about the S55 & S57? (And the X22 for that matter).

 

But yeah, you're not going to see a bus route paralleling the SIR for any significant distance.

[qjtransitmaster]

I know that, but the thing is that there aren't many people on the bus itself (I remember a while back, you mentioned that the S84 empties out at Broad Street by the Stapleton Houses, which makes sense because further south, riders are either on the train, or the areas are less densely populated and people are either driving or on the express bus). The point of the limited is to have people benefit from the quicker ride, but there aren't many people on board to benefit. It's not like say, the S91/92 alongside Silver Lake Park, where they have a decent amount of riders on board who benefit from skipping all those stops.

 

I mean, the thing is that the S84 splits away from the SIR once you pass New Dorp, so the SIR doesn't help those riders seeking areas like the ETC or points along Arthur Kill Road west of Richmond Avenue. I know there's not a lot of riders who board by the Berry Houses, but it's not a lot of riders are already on board the buses either.

 

 

 

What about the S55 & S57? (And the X22 for that matter).

 

But yeah, you're not going to see a bus route paralleling the SIR for any significant distance.

 

That was what I meant !!! Again read carefully if not ask me to clarify.

[checkmatechamp13]

Where's that facepalm?

 

Why the hell do you think I put the sign up? Yeah, I know what you meant, and that's why I said "But yeah"

[qjtransitmaster]

Where's that facepalm?

 

Why the hell do you think I put the sign up? Yeah, I know what you meant, and that's why I said "But yeah"

 

I knew what you meant so why is it a problem.

[checkmatechamp13]

I knew what you meant so why is it a problem.

 

 

You said "read carefully". That implies that you thought that I didn't know what you were talking about.

[checkmatechamp13]

I was just thinking: With the damage from Hurricane Sandy, there was probably a large loss in population in South Beach, Midland Beach, New Dorp Beach, and Oakwood Beach. I wonder what effect it'll have on ridership on the S51 & S76. Could it possibly mean the end of their limited-stop variants?

 

For that matter, I heard the West Shore Plaza was flooded (I mean, it was basically built on wetlands), and I was wondering whether that would mean that all S46s would terminate at the Teleport instead. But it's a moot point now, because they repaired most of the damage.

[qjtransitmaster]

I was just thinking: With the damage from Hurricane Sandy, there was probably a large loss in population in South Beach, Midland Beach, New Dorp Beach, and Oakwood Beach. I wonder what effect it'll have on ridership on the S51 & S76. Could it possibly mean the end of their limited-stop variants?

 

For that matter, I heard the West Shore Plaza was flooded (I mean, it was basically built on wetlands), and I was wondering whether that would mean that all S46s would terminate at the Teleport instead. But it's a moot point now, because they repaired most of the damage.

 

I think S86 and 81 are practically done for.

[Turbo19]

I was just thinking: With the damage from Hurricane Sandy, there was probably a large loss in population in South Beach, Midland Beach, New Dorp Beach, and Oakwood Beach. I wonder what effect it'll have on ridership on the S51 & S76. Could it possibly mean the end of their limited-stop variants?

 

For that matter, I heard the West Shore Plaza was flooded (I mean, it was basically built on wetlands), and I was wondering whether that would mean that all S46s would terminate at the Teleport instead. But it's a moot point now, because they repaired most of the damage.

I believe would account for the past weather conditions prior to adjusting services, then again they could be looking for an excuse to cut service. Should cut service, it would be detrimental to passengers.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I believe would account for the past weather conditions prior to adjusting services, then again they could be looking for an excuse to cut service. Should cut service, it would be detrimental to passengers.

They would be foolish to cut service drastically because the idea is to rebuild those homes at some point. It's just a question of how soon and under what guidelines.

Edited November 29, 2012 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Turbo19]

They would be foolish to cut service drastically because the idea is to rebuild those homes at some point. It's just a question of how soon and under what guidelines.

 

Exactly my point.But the MTA has been pulling some ridiculous shit as of late.

[checkmatechamp13]

I believe would account for the past weather conditions prior to adjusting services, then again they could be looking for an excuse to cut service. Should cut service, it would be detrimental to passengers.

 

 

Well, I don't think it'll happen right away, because people are still fixing up the damage and everything, but I can picture it happening further down the line.

 

With a lot of the routes, part of the reason why limited service was added was because two buses were required to handle the riders at St. George, and they figured that they might as well help those further out, and have the one that isn't short-turning make limited stops, to help those riders further out. That's part of the reason why the S90 & S96 started out as PM-only routes (and part of the reason why the S81/84/86 still run PM rush only), because you have both buses leaving St. George at the exact same time, so if they were both local, they'd both be right behind each other the full route. In the AM rush, it's a little harder to schedule it so that you have one local and one limited meeting each ferry, so that might've been why they were more hesitant to put AM limiteds on those routes.

 

And that's part of the reason why some routes have limited service until 10:00PM: Because they saw that they had 2 buses meeting the ferry, even at that hour, so they figured they might as well run one of them limited to benefit the passengers further out. It's just that in some cases, they did it later than others (they gave the S96 service until 10:00PM, but at that hour, they gave Forest Avenue two S48s, rather than an S48 & S98 so it wasn't a matter of them giving Castleton Avenue "more service", but more that they used the service differently on Castleton Avenue compared to Forest). Maybe they felt that there were people using the service between the local stops and Arlington, but eventually they figured they'd benefit more passengers overall by having one bus run limited.

 

In any case, getting back from that tangent, my point is that if ridership decreases enough due to the damage and population loss, they might not be able to justify that second bus, meaning that the one bus that meets the ferry would have to run local.

 

They would be foolish to cut service drastically because the idea is to rebuild those homes at some point. It's just a question of how soon and under what guidelines.

 

 

Those routes run PM rush hours only, and the S86 only has 4 trips. It's far from a drastic cut.

 

In any case, that's why I said they'll likely do it further down the road, so they get an idea as to how much is being rebuilt, and what the population would be like. The fact that the area is basically built on wetlands might discourage some people from moving back, so they'll take their insurance money or whatever and buy/build a new home somewhere else.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Those routes run PM rush hours only, and the S86 only has 4 trips. It's far from a drastic cut.

 

In any case, that's why I said they'll likely do it further down the road, so they get an idea as to how much is being rebuilt, and what the population would be like. The fact that the area is basically built on wetlands might discourage some people from moving back, so they'll take their insurance money or whatever and buy/build a new home somewhere else.

 

I didn't say anything about PM rush hour runs. I was talking about service in general. It was you that was talking about limited stop service and Turbo and I both spoke about service in general for the area.

Edited November 29, 2012 by Via Garibaldi 8

[qjtransitmaster]

Does X22 need full-time? but off-peak trips can do this serve victory blvd then go to manhattan via rte 440 and holland tunnel running every 30 mins at off-peak will weekend service be needed?

 

 

And off-peak it's open-door since no local duplicates it. Rush closed -door. X12 becomes full-time BUT weekdays only off-peak and reverse service stops in bay ridge.

 

New X33 running every 30 mins off-peak and 14 at rush to brooklyn heights/Downtown brooklyn via bay ridge and forest ave arlington harbor then via x14 routing to bay ridge then express to columbia street then via brooklyn heights to downtown brooklyn. Downtown brooklyn is only served directly at rush hour off peak it goes to dumbo.

Edited November 29, 2012 by qjtransitmaster

[checkmatechamp13]

Does X22 need full-time? but off-peak trips can do this serve victory blvd then go to manhattan via rte 440 and holland tunnel running every 30 mins at off-peak will weekend service be needed?

 

What route would you have it take within Manhattan?

 

In any case, I'm not sure. Remember that the X17 also serves that area, and while the advantage of the X22 is that it would bypass Lower Manhattan (which is why I'd just have it use the Lincoln Tunnel like it does now), I'm not sure if there's enough South Shore - Midtown ridership to justify a whole service just for that.

 

And off-peak it's open-door since no local duplicates it. Rush closed -door. X12 becomes full-time BUT weekdays only off-peak and reverse service stops in bay ridge.

 

 

I don't think there's a need. Just add more X10 service when necessary. Maybe expand the span a little bit, but that's about it. The X10 during middays doesn't seem that crowded, where they'll be adding a lot of service anytime soon.

 

New X33 running every 30 mins off-peak and 14 at rush to brooklyn heights/Downtown brooklyn via bay ridge and forest ave arlington harbor then via x14 routing to bay ridge then express to columbia street then via brooklyn heights to downtown brooklyn. Downtown brooklyn is only served directly at rush hour off peak it goes to dumbo.

 

 

If such a route were to exist, I don't think you'd be able to justify much more than a few rush hour trips. (Especially if the S83 is created).

[B35 via Church]

Does X22 need full-time? but off-peak trips can do this serve victory blvd then go to manhattan via rte 440 and holland tunnel running every 30 mins at off-peak will weekend service be needed?

 

What is all this? off peak x22's running along victory & through bayonne to get to manhattan....

 

No, the x22 does not need off peak service.... and even if it did, the routing you're choosing grossly deviates from the current 22 route.... You'd be serving a completely different riderbase off peak than peak....

[qjtransitmaster]

What route would you have it take within Manhattan?

 

In any case, I'm not sure. Remember that the X17 also serves that area, and while the advantage of the X22 is that it would bypass Lower Manhattan (which is why I'd just have it use the Lincoln Tunnel like it does now), I'm not sure if there's enough South Shore - Midtown ridership to justify a whole service just for that.

It would make up for it by acting local south of victory but I see your point. I would have it use WS highway to 42nd and making it's stops normal. It may pickup on christopher street then 14th and 23rd at west side hwy. At rush many DHs will get converted into reverse trips.

 

 

I don't think there's a need. Just add more X10 service when necessary. Maybe expand the span a little bit, but that's about it. The X10 during middays doesn't seem that crowded, where they'll be adding a lot of service anytime soon.

 

I made that proposal to convert the DHs into revenue especially the midday ones your better off running in revenue rather than empty. It will stop at bay ridge on weekdays off-peak as an alternative to the quick X17 in a way.

 

If such a route were to exist, I don't think you'd be able to justify much more than a few rush hour trips. (Especially if the S83 is created).Off-peak it can safely use BQE to stop at atlantic ave then go express to williamsburg. BUT rush hr it will have to end at downtown brooklyn via brooklyn heights another bus will come here from LGA which is MTA's new line to marcy station then express via quickest way to downtown brooklyn and tillary. Off peak it will end at marcy ave station more on that in brooklyn thread.

 

X33 see my brooklyn proposal for clues for possible connections and uses remember think differently than you do. This is meant to run beyond rush S83 is only going to be peak and will allow open-door LTD service on forest ave. But it will reach dumbo/heights area as many cars use BQE to reach that area OR heights to williamsburg via flushing ave or BQE non-stop. At work shifts the navy yard will be served and it will be faster than the to the basically it was designed to reduce the congestion on the gowanus clusterf**k. I noticed that a HUGE amount of south-bound travellers and traffic on the gowanus expressway DID NOT come from the battery tunnel but the BQE which leads to where along the BQE are these people coming from most likely williamsburg and dumbo as that is where I-278 gets really congested. This line is designed to be the transit alternative to attract new ridership to area buses so it will indirectly serve brooklyn AND SI folks heading to those places.

What is all this? off peak x22's running along victory & through bayonne to get to manhattan....

 

No, the x22 does not need off peak service.... and even if it did, the routing you're choosing grossly deviates from the current 22 route.... You'd be serving a completely different riderbase off peak than peak....

 

interesting you have a point In off-peak it would allow local passengers and manhattan bound folk before going super express to midtown manhattan. Actually it absorbs victory blvd to willowbrook expressway to holland tunnel direct to midtown. Or south ave to forest ave then express to midtown manhattan. Edited November 30, 2012 by qjtransitmaster

[checkmatechamp13]

No way should this new X33 be more of a priority than limited service on the S53. The X33 shouldn't run full-time while the S83 runs rush hours. That's all I have to say for now.

[qjtransitmaster]

No way should this new X33 be more of a priority than limited service on the S53. The X33 shouldn't run full-time while the S83 runs rush hours. That's all I have to say for now.

 

S83 does need full time service BUT I was quoting MTA sources. FYI it will double as a LTD in SI on forest ave. Edited November 30, 2012 by qjtransitmaster

[checkmatechamp13]

Anyway, this doesn't really have to do with the SI bus system directly (though it does a little bit, because it affects which buses you can connect to), but I think the express pattern of the SIR should be changed a little.

 

Right now, trains go express from New Dorp to St. George in the morning and St. George to Great Kills in the afternoon. I'd modify it to have the express trains all stop at Grasmere, then New Dorp, then Great Kills, then all local stops to Tottenville. This way, you serve the major stops better. You offer a connection to the S53, which is a major one, and you also offer a connection to the bus routes in New Dorp (and New Dorp Lane is a pretty busy commercial area)

 

I know those express trains floor it on that express run, so the disadvantage would be that it would ruin the momentum near those stops, so it would be a trade-off.

 

Also, I think there could be a few reverse-peak PM express runs. They actually used to have them, but at that time, the SIR ran more like a commuter rail, and there was no setup as to which stops would be skipped. They would have trains skip some random stops, and then stop at some other stops, which was alright for those going to St. George, but a PITA for those traveling within SI (though actually, it was a PITA for those who lived further out, because they didn't have a solid express run like they do today). Of course, it was all scheduled that way, and you knew that certain trains skipped certain stops, but still. In any case, I think a few reverse-peak express trips would be good (they already have some reverse-peak AM express trains)

 

Also, I think the connection time to reach the ferry should be reduced by just a little. In the AM rush, the local trains arrive 12 minutes before the ferry, but the ferry runs every 15 minutes, so basically they're scheduled to miss the previous ferry by 3 minutes. The express trains arrive 9 minutes before the ferry. I'd have the express trains arrive 6-7 minutes before the ferry, and the local trains arrive 9 minutes before the ferry, to reduce the amount of wasted time.

 

I obviously understand you need a cushion, but I think 12 minutes is too much. I think it should be 9 minutes throughout the day for the local trains.